探讨超声液培养在人工关节周围感染中的作用:与常规方法的比较研究。

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Nigerian Journal of Clinical Practice Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-26 DOI:10.4103/njcp.njcp_860_23
M Erem, E Selçuk, M Ozcan, G Ozturk, C Eryıldız
{"title":"探讨超声液培养在人工关节周围感染中的作用:与常规方法的比较研究。","authors":"M Erem, E Selçuk, M Ozcan, G Ozturk, C Eryıldız","doi":"10.4103/njcp.njcp_860_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the diagnostic effectiveness of sonication fluid culture (SFC) compared to conventional methods in identifying the causative microorganisms in periprosthetic joint infections.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this study, three cultures were evaluated for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection intraoperative periprosthetic tissue culture, implant culture, and SFC. The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were calculated for each method, using the 2018 definition of periprosthetic hip and knee infection and clinical evaluation as references. Of the 92 patients who had implants removed, 49 were for mechanical reasons and 43 for infection.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Positive cultures were obtained in 13 out of 49 patients with mechanical issues and 31 out of 43 with infections. The sensitivity of periprosthetic tissue cultures (53.5%) is slightly higher than SFC (48.8%), suggesting better detection of positive cases. However, SFC's specificity (83.7%) is higher, indicating more accurate identification of negative cases compared to periprosthetic cultures (73.5%). However, SFC identified additional pathogens in patients with negative periprosthetic tissue and implant cultures. Examination of the infected knee and hip prostheses showed that SFC enhanced pathogen detection, particularly in patients with negative implant cultures. Despite this, SFC was not statistically superior to other methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study supports the combined use of periprosthetic tissue culture and SFC for identifying causative microorganisms in implant infections. Despite not being statistically superior, SFC provides additional pathogen detection, especially when other methods fail, thereby enhancing overall diagnostic accuracy.</p>","PeriodicalId":19431,"journal":{"name":"Nigerian Journal of Clinical Practice","volume":"28 4","pages":"480-486"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring the Role of Sonication Fluid Culture in Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Comparative Study with Conventional Methods.\",\"authors\":\"M Erem, E Selçuk, M Ozcan, G Ozturk, C Eryıldız\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/njcp.njcp_860_23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the diagnostic effectiveness of sonication fluid culture (SFC) compared to conventional methods in identifying the causative microorganisms in periprosthetic joint infections.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this study, three cultures were evaluated for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection intraoperative periprosthetic tissue culture, implant culture, and SFC. The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were calculated for each method, using the 2018 definition of periprosthetic hip and knee infection and clinical evaluation as references. Of the 92 patients who had implants removed, 49 were for mechanical reasons and 43 for infection.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Positive cultures were obtained in 13 out of 49 patients with mechanical issues and 31 out of 43 with infections. The sensitivity of periprosthetic tissue cultures (53.5%) is slightly higher than SFC (48.8%), suggesting better detection of positive cases. However, SFC's specificity (83.7%) is higher, indicating more accurate identification of negative cases compared to periprosthetic cultures (73.5%). However, SFC identified additional pathogens in patients with negative periprosthetic tissue and implant cultures. Examination of the infected knee and hip prostheses showed that SFC enhanced pathogen detection, particularly in patients with negative implant cultures. Despite this, SFC was not statistically superior to other methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study supports the combined use of periprosthetic tissue culture and SFC for identifying causative microorganisms in implant infections. Despite not being statistically superior, SFC provides additional pathogen detection, especially when other methods fail, thereby enhancing overall diagnostic accuracy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19431,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nigerian Journal of Clinical Practice\",\"volume\":\"28 4\",\"pages\":\"480-486\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nigerian Journal of Clinical Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/njcp.njcp_860_23\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nigerian Journal of Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/njcp.njcp_860_23","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是评估和比较超声液体培养(SFC)与传统方法在鉴定假体周围关节感染的病原微生物的诊断效果。方法:本研究采用术中假体周围组织培养、种植体培养和SFC三种培养方法诊断假体周围关节感染,参照2018年髋关节和膝关节周围感染定义和临床评价,计算每种方法的敏感性、特异性和预测值。在92名移除植入物的患者中,49名是机械原因,43名是感染。结果:49例机械问题患者中有13例培养阳性,43例感染患者中有31例培养阳性。假体周围组织培养的敏感性(53.5%)略高于SFC(48.8%),提示对阳性病例的检测效果更好。然而,SFC的特异性(83.7%)更高,表明与假体周围培养(73.5%)相比,对阴性病例的识别更准确。然而,SFC在假体周围组织和种植体培养阴性的患者中发现了额外的病原体。对受感染的膝关节和髋关节假体的检查显示,SFC增强了病原体的检测,特别是在假体培养阴性的患者中。尽管如此,SFC在统计学上并不优于其他方法。结论:本研究支持假体周围组织培养和SFC联合用于鉴定种植体感染的致病微生物。尽管在统计上不占优势,但SFC提供了额外的病原体检测,特别是当其他方法失败时,从而提高了整体诊断的准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exploring the Role of Sonication Fluid Culture in Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Comparative Study with Conventional Methods.

Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the diagnostic effectiveness of sonication fluid culture (SFC) compared to conventional methods in identifying the causative microorganisms in periprosthetic joint infections.

Methods: In this study, three cultures were evaluated for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection intraoperative periprosthetic tissue culture, implant culture, and SFC. The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were calculated for each method, using the 2018 definition of periprosthetic hip and knee infection and clinical evaluation as references. Of the 92 patients who had implants removed, 49 were for mechanical reasons and 43 for infection.

Results: Positive cultures were obtained in 13 out of 49 patients with mechanical issues and 31 out of 43 with infections. The sensitivity of periprosthetic tissue cultures (53.5%) is slightly higher than SFC (48.8%), suggesting better detection of positive cases. However, SFC's specificity (83.7%) is higher, indicating more accurate identification of negative cases compared to periprosthetic cultures (73.5%). However, SFC identified additional pathogens in patients with negative periprosthetic tissue and implant cultures. Examination of the infected knee and hip prostheses showed that SFC enhanced pathogen detection, particularly in patients with negative implant cultures. Despite this, SFC was not statistically superior to other methods.

Conclusion: This study supports the combined use of periprosthetic tissue culture and SFC for identifying causative microorganisms in implant infections. Despite not being statistically superior, SFC provides additional pathogen detection, especially when other methods fail, thereby enhancing overall diagnostic accuracy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Nigerian Journal of Clinical Practice
Nigerian Journal of Clinical Practice MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
275
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Nigerian Journal of Clinical Practice is a Monthly peer-reviewed international journal published by the Medical and Dental Consultants’ Association of Nigeria. The journal’s full text is available online at www.njcponline.com. The journal allows free access (Open Access) to its contents and permits authors to self-archive final accepted version of the articles on any OAI-compliant institutional / subject-based repository. The journal makes a token charge for submission, processing and publication of manuscripts including color reproduction of photographs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信